You are on page 1of 7

J Electr Eng Technol Vol. 8, No.

1: 190-196, 2013
http://dx.doi.org/10.5370/JEET.2013.8.1.190

190
A Hybrid Guidance Law for a Strapdown Seeker to Maintain
Lock-on Conditions against High Speed Targets


Chae Heun Lee*, Chul Hyun

, Jang Gyu Lee**,


Jin Yung Choi** and Sangkyung Sung***

Abstract This paper proposes a new guidance law, which considers the Field of View (FOV) of the
seeker when a missile has a strapdown seeker mounted instead of a gimbal seeker. When a strapdown
seeker, which has a narrow FOV, is used for tracking a target, the FOV of the seeker is an important
consideration for guidance performance metrics such as miss distance. We propose a new guidance
law called hybrid guidance (HG) to address the shortcomings of conventional guidance laws such as
proportional navigation guidance (PNG), which cannot maintain lock-on conditions against high speed
targets due to the narrow FOV of the strapdown seeker. The aim of the HG law is to null miss distance
and to maintain the look angle within the FOV of the strapdown seeker. In order to achieve this goal,
we combine two guidance laws in the HG law. One is a PNG law to null the LOS rate, and the other is
a sliding mode guidance (SMG) law derived to keep the look angle within the FOV by employing a
Lyapunov-like function with a sliding mode control methodology. We also propose a method to switch
these two guidance laws at certain look angles for better guidance performance.

Keywords: Field of view, Sliding mode control, Strapdown seeker, Switching boundary



1. Introduction

In recent years, numerous studies have attempted to
replace the gimbaled seeker with a strapdown seeker for
homing missiles. The gimbaled seeker is installed on a
platform which is stabilized by the gimbal system. The
gimbaled seeker has a stabilization loop to isolate body
rotation, and a track loop to maintain the seeker axis along
the missile-target LOS (Line-Of-Sight). On the other hand,
the strapdown seeker is rigidly mounted on the missile
body. The strapdown seeker has an advantage in that it can
be more simply and economically implemented with sensor
electronics in comparison to a gimbaled seeker. But the
strapdown seeker has a relatively narrow FOV (Field-Of-
View) compared to the gimbaled seeker [1, 2]. This weak
point of the strapdown seeker leads to target misses air-to-
air engagements. In view of this problem, our research in
this paper focuses to derive a guidance law so that missiles
with narrow FOV strapdown seekers maintain lock-on
conditions until intercepting the target.
Most modern homing missiles make use of PNG
(Proportional Navigation Guidance) law based on LOS rate
[3-7]. The PNG law seeks to null the LOS rate by making
the missile flight angle rate be directly proportional to the
LOS rate. The PNG law can be easily implemented with
the LOS rate. The simplicity of the PNG law has been
widely recognized [8, 9]. But targets can frequently move
out of the seeker FOV when a missile with a strapdown
seeker is guided by the PNG law against high speed targets.
This leads the missile to lose the lock-on condition, which
results in the failure of intercepting the target.
Xin, balakrishnan and Ohlmeyer [10] used the seeker
FOV as a constraint of the nonlinear optimal control
problem to create a missile guidance law. Daekyu Sang
[11] proposed a guidance law switching logic between an
original law such as PNG and a guidance law which makes
the look angle constant during the homing phase at a
predefined FOV limit. The above two instances are limited
to a target that stands still. Meanwhile, to overcome the
limitation of FOV for a high speed target, this paper
proposes a hybrid guidance (HG) law. To maintain lock-on
conditions, this law combines two guidance laws. One is a
conventional PNG law to null the LOS rate, the other is a
Sliding Mode Guidance (SMG) law derived in this paper to
decrease the look angle of the strapdown seeker. Because
the PNG has robustness for model parameters and good
homing guidance performance compared with the proposed
SMG, the PNG is mainly used in HG. And the SMG
contributes only to decrease the look angle. The PNG law
is used when the look angle is under a certain angle that is
used as a switching boundary, and represents an alert for
the possibility that the look angle may become larger than
the FOV limit. The SMG law is used over the switching
Corresponding Author: M&S R&D Lab, LIG Nex1(chul.hyun@
lignex1.com)
* Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Seoul National
University/ASRI (dlcogms1@snu.ac.kr)
** Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Seoul National
University ({jgl, jychoi} @snu.ac.kr)
*** Department of Aerospace Information Engineering, Konkuk
University (sksung@konkuk.ac.kr)
Received: June 6, 2012; Accepted: September 10, 2012
ISSN(Print) 1975-0102
ISSN(Online) 2093-7423

Chae Heun Lee, Chul Hyun, Jang Gyu Lee, Jin Yung Choi and Sangkyung Sung

191
boundary. The switching boundaries are derived by
considering guidance system characteristics such as time
constant, the missile velocity and the look angle rate. This
method increases the confidence in intercept success
because the missile maintains the lock-on conditions on a
nearby target.
This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 clarifies the
characteristics of the strapdown seeker and deals with
equations related to the engagement geometry of the
missile and target. Section 3 presents the derivation of the
proposed guidance law and the switching boundary.
Section 4 gives the simulated evidence in support of the
performance. In the final section, we will conclude by
summarizing this paper.


2. Strapdown Seeker Characteristics and Pursuit
Kinematics and Dynamics

2.1 Strapdown seeker characteristic

A general seeker angular configuration is depicted in Fig.
1. In gimbaled seeker, the antenna centerline and missile
centerline move independently from each other by a seeker
stabilization loop. That is, a seeker head angle ( )
h
t can
be varied with time. In the strapdown seeker, on the other
hand, the antenna centerline and missile centerline are
fixed because the strapdown seeker is rigidly mounted on
the missile body. Therefore their measurements are relative
to the body frame of the missile. In this paper, we assume
the following for simplicity of analysis:

A1) The antenna centerline is aligned with the missile
centerline ( 0
h
= ).
A2) The seeker dynamics are fast enough to be neglected.

Line Parallel to Original LOS
: Look Angle
: Seeker Head Angle
Missile Centerline
LOS to Target
: LOS Angle
m

Antenna Centerline
h

: Missile Flight Path Angle



Fig. 1. Seeker angular configuration

2.2 Pursuit kinematics and dynamics

The general three-dimensional guidance can be dealt
with by resolving the LOS rate vector into two lateral
planes of the missile by neglecting cross-coupling between
the two orthogonal components such as pitch and yaw
plane. We consider only two-dimensional planar guidance
in this paper. To facilitate the performance analysis of the
proposed guidance law, we assume the following.

A3) The missile and the target are considered as geometric
points moving in the pitch plane.
A4) The missile angle-of-attack is ignored.
A5) The missile velocity
m
V and target velocity
t
V are
constant.
A6) The autopilot and airframe have first order dynamics.

Under the above assumptions, the engagement geometry
of the missile and the target is depicted in Fig. 2.
The target moves with the velocity
t
V and the normal
acceleration
t
a . The missile chases the target with the
velocity
m
V and the normal acceleration
m
a . The normal
acceleration
m
a is obtained by an acceleration command
mc
a through first order dynamics with time constant

.
The strapdown seeker measures the look angle
m
, which
depends on the attitude of the missile and the LOS angle

. The LOS angle

, which is used in PNG law, is


obtained by combining the look angle and the attitude of
the missile. From A3), A5), the missile flight path angle
m
replaces the attitude of the missile.
Based on the above engagement geometry, the
kinematics and the dynamics are obtained as follows:
t
V
m

r
Missile
Target
Original LOS
t
a
m
a
m
V

Fig. 2. Engagement geometry


t
t
t
a
V
=
(1)

m
m
m
a
V
=
(2)
cos cos
t t m m
r V V =
(3)
sin sin
t t m m
r V V =
(4)

where
t
,
m
and
mc
a are defined by:


t t
= (5)

m m
= (6)

1
1
m mc
a a
s
=
+
(7)

where

and
t
are a time constant and a target flight
angle, respectively.
A Hybrid Guidance Law for a Strapdown Seeker to Maintain Lock-on Conditions against High Speed Targets

192

3. Hybrid Guidance Law Logic Design

3.1 Hybrid guidance law scheme

The PNG law is the most widely used in guidance
because it is easily implemented and has good homing
guidance performance. But it can frequently occur that the
missile fails to chase high speed targets when a strapdown
seeker is used. Alternatively, this paper proposes the HG
law, which combines two guidance laws: the PNG law and
the SMG law. The two guidance laws are switched between
each other at a certain value of the look angle
m
called
the switching boundary,
, m boundary

. In the first phase, where


the look angle is within the switching boundary, the PNG
law controls the missile. In the second phase, when the
look angle is over the switching boundary, the SMG law is
adopted to keep the look angle within the FOV. If a
guidance system is ideal, there exists a chattering problem
when two guidance laws are switched for one switching
boundary. But the continuity of the delayed acceleration
through the autopilot removes the chattering phenomenon.
As can be seen in Fig. 3, while the missile is guided by
the PNG law in the first phase, a maximum look angle is
predicted on-line under the adoption of the SMG law based
on the current look angle. When the predictive maximum
look angle is equal to the FOV, the second phase is started
and the current look angle is regarded as the switching
boundary. In the second phase, the SMG law controls the
missile while the look angle is larger than the switching
boundary. When the look angle is less than the switching
boundary, the first phase is adopted again. This logic is
iterated until the missile intercepts the target.

3.2 Proportional Navigation Guidance

Recently, proportional navigation guidance (PNG) law
has been widely used for tactical applications. The PNG
law can be derived to null the LOS rate. Among various
PNG laws, we use the pure PNG (PPNG) law, which
generates the acceleration command perpendicular to the
velocity vector of the missile:


1 mc m
a N V =
(8)

where
1
N is a unitless designer-chosen gain that is usually
in the rage of 3 ~ 5 . In this paper, we use
1
N of 3.

3.3 Sliding mode guidance law

The sliding mode control methodology is used in the
second phase guidance law derivation [12, 13]. In order to
apply the sliding mode control, we set a switching surface.
The guidance goal in this phase is to reduce the look angle
against the high speed target. Hence, the switching surface
should be chosen such that:

( ) ( )
m
s t t = (9)

The basic idea for the selection of the above switching
surface is to decrease the look angle. The next step is to
design a control law that satisfies the sliding condition. To
achieve this, we consider the time derivative of a Lyapunov
function
2
( ) / 2 V s t = .

( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
( ) ( ) .
m m
m m
m
m
m
V s t s t
t t
t t t
a t
t t
V



=
=
=
| |
=
|
\ .

(10)

It is regarded that a delay between the normal
acceleration
m
a and the acceleration command
mc
a is
neglected herein. That is,


m mc
a a = (11)


Fig. 3. Hybrid guidance law scheme
Chae Heun Lee, Chul Hyun, Jang Gyu Lee, Jin Yung Choi and Sangkyung Sung

193
The control
mc
a that will ensure that the above equation
is less than zero is:


2
( ) ( ) sgn( )
mc m m
a t V t N =
(12)

where
2
0 N > is constant, and sgn( )
m
is a sign function
as follows:


1 if 0
sgn( ) 0 if 0
1 if 0
x
x x
x
>

= =

<

(13)

The first term of the SMG law of (12) is an acceleration
value to keep the look angle steady. The second term
influences the degree to lead the look angle to zero.

3.4 Switching boundary estimation

If the missile is guided by only the SMG law, it is
steered so that the velocity vector of the missile points at
the target at every instant in time. Then, the closer the
missile approaches the target, the more it needs the normal
acceleration command to turn towards the target. Finally,
the normal acceleration command exceeds the missile
hardware limit and the missile fails to intercept the high
speed target. On the other hand, because the PNG law
orients the missile to an estimated interception point, it
does not have this problem. The PNG law has better
intercept performance against the high speed target than the
SMG law. Therefore it is important that we decide the
switching boundary
, m boundary

to use the PNG law as much


as possible during the overall homing phase.
Meanwhile, because there are some delays between
m
a
and
mc
a in an actual situation, the look angle is increased
gradually during a certain time although the SMG law is
adopted. The pattern of the look angle in the second phase
is influenced by the characteristics of guidance system,
such as system delay, and the engagement, such as missile
velocity and look angle rate and so on. In order to keep the
pattern of the look angle in second phase as similar as
possible in various engagements, the gain
2
N of the SMG
law is determined by considering the time constant of the
guidance system, the look angle rate and the missile
velocity. To consider these factors, let us choose the gain
2
N feasibly such that:


2
( )
m m b
N V t =

(14)

where

,
m
V ,
0 >
and
b
t are the time constant, the
missile velocity, a proportional gain and the time to switch
from the first phase to the second phase, respectively.
( )
m b
t

is the look angle rate at the time


b
t .
As shown in Fig. 4, we assume that the guidance law is
changed from the first phase to the second phase at certain
time
0
t . The red dash-dot line represents the predicted
maximum look angle with SMG law. The look angle
reaches its peak at the time
0 0

t T + , the maximum value of


the look angle
0
,max

m
t t

=
and
0

T can be predicted by
using parameters of the time
0
t . To predict these values,
we assume as follows:


0

( ) ( ) t t = ,
0 0 0

[ , ] t t t T + (15)

Then the predicted acceleration command is:


0
0 0

( ) ( ) ( )

( ) ( )
( ).
mc m m m
m m m
mc
a t V t V t
V t V t
a const


=
=
=

,
0 0 0

[ , ] t t t T + (16)

If the predicted acceleration command is a constant, the
estimate of the normal acceleration is related to the
predicted acceleration command.

( )
0 0
( ) / ( ) /
0
( ) ( ) 1
t t t t
m m mc
a t e a t e a

= + (17)

Differentiating (6) and using (2), (9) and (14), we can
derive the following equation for the estimation of the look
angle rate.

( ) { }
( )
( )
( )
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
( ) / ( ) /
0 0
( ) / ( ) /
0
0 0 0
( ) / ( ) / 0
0


( ) ( ) ( )
( )
( )
1
( ) 1 ( ) ( )
1
{ ( ) 1

( ) ( ) } ( )
( )
( ) 1 (
m
m
m
t t t t
m mc
m
t t t t
m
m
m m m
t t t t m
m
m
t t t
a t
t
V
e a t e a t t
V
e a t e
V
V t V t t
a t
e t e t
V








=
=
= +
= +

| |
=
|
\ .

0
)

m

: predicted
maximum look angle
with SMG law
Actual trajectory
1
t
1st Phase
2nd Phase
t
FOV
,

m boundary

0
t
0
,max

m
t t

=
1
,max

m
t t

=

Fig. 4. Estimation of switching boundary

A Hybrid Guidance Law for a Strapdown Seeker to Maintain Lock-on Conditions against High Speed Targets

194
( )
( ) { }
0 0
0
( ) / ( ) /
0 0
( ) /
0
( ) 1 ( )
1 ( ).
t t t t
m m
t t
m
e t e t
e t





=
= +

(18)

In Fig. 4, when the estimated look angle rate is zero, the
estimated look angle reaches its peak.

( )
{ }
0

/
0 0 0

( ) 1 ( ) 0
T
m m
t T e t

+ = + =

(19)

Thus,
0

T satisfying (17) is the estimated time that


elapses from the start time of the second phase up to the
time when the estimated look angle is maximum.


0

ln
1
T

| |
=
|
+
\ .
(20)

Therefore the varied quantity of the estimated look angle
during
0
t and
0 0

t T + is:


( ) { }
( )( ) { }
0 0
0
0 0
( ) /
0
/
0

( ) 1 ( )
1 1 ( ).
t T t T
t t
m m
t t
T
m
t dt e t dt
e T t



+ +

= +
= +

(21)

The maximum look angle which is estimated at the time
0
t is obtained by:

( )
( ) { }
0 0
0 0
0

,max 0

/
0 0 0

( ) ( )

( ) 1 1 ( ).
t T
m m m
t t t
T
m m
t t dt
t e T t



+
=

= +
= + +


(22)

As depicted in Fig.4,
0
,max

m
t t

=
is smaller than the FOV
of the strapdown seeker. Thus the missile chases the target
using the first guidance law. We iterate this process until
the updated maximum of the estimated look angle equals
the FOV of the strapdown seeker.
1
t is the time satisfying:


1
,max

m
t t
FOV
=
=
(23)

where FOV is the FOV of the strapdown seeker.
1
( )
m
t
is determined as the switching boundary. And the missile is
guided by the second guidance law from this time
1
t until
( )
m
t is smaller than the switching boundary.
There are some errors between the peaks of actual and
estimated look angle, because the estimated LOS angle rate
has some errors. The problem occurs when the actual look
angle exceeds the FOV of the strapdown seeker. Then the
seeker lock-on condition is broken. The missile keeps the
acceleration command at the time when it misses the target.
The errors between the two peaks of actual and estimated
look angle are small and the acceleration command is large
enough to decrease the look angle. Thus, even if this
situation occurs, the actual look angle eventually enters the
FOV of the strapdown seeker quickly.


3. Simulation

In this simulation, the guidance loop is regarded as a
first-order system which has a time constant of 1s. The
arget initially flies 3.4 km away from the missile. The
initial target flight angle, the initial missile flight path angle
and the initial LOS angle are 50deg, -10deg and 0deg,
respectively. Also, the velocity of the missile and target are
640m/s and 300m/s, respectively. The FOV of the
strapdown seeker is 30deg (-15~+15). The simulation
results are presented in Fig. 5. For the purpose of
comparison, the conventional PNG law is employed in this
simulation. The conventional PNG law is a Pure PNG
(PPNG) law, as in [14]. In Fig. 5, the dashed line and the
solid line represent the trajectories of the missile by the
PPNG law and the proposed guidance law, respectively.
The dotted line indicates the high speed target trajectory.
The missile guided by the PPNG law goes beyond the FOV
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
Position of M/T
Downrange [km]
C
r
o
s
s
r
a
n
g
e

[
k
m
]


Missile(PPN)
Missile(HG)
Target

(a) Trajectory of missile and target
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
Look Angle
t [sec]


m

[
d
e
g
]


Missile(PPN)
Missile(HG)
FOV: 15[deg]

(b) Look angle of missile by PPN and HG law
Fig. 5. Simulation Results

Chae Heun Lee, Chul Hyun, Jang Gyu Lee, Jin Yung Choi and Sangkyung Sung

195
of the strapdown seeker after 1.4s and fails to intercept the
target. On the other hand, the missile guided by the
proposed HG law maintains the seeker lock-on condition
until it is near the target. Comparing the two guidance laws,
the PPNG law and the HG law have miss distances of
about 640m and 1.3m, respectively.
The various engagements are tabulated in Table 1. The
other conditions are fixed as above. The miss distances for
several cases of engagements are tabulated in Table 2.
In case of the HG law, because the relative range in
which a missile needs an acceleration command exceeding
its hardware limit is greater as the target flight angle grows
larger, the miss distances are longer, as in Table 2. In case
of the PNG law, reversely, the miss distances are shorter as
the target flight angle grows larger. These results show that
the path of the missile which misses the target and the path
of the target are close by chance. But these results also
demonstrate that the proposed guidance law increases the
success probability to intercept the target in various
engagements.


Table 1. Various engagements
a b c d e f
Initial Target Flight
Angle
t
[deg]
45 45 90 90 120 120
Initial Missile Flight
Angle
m
[deg]
10 -10 10 -10 10 -10


Table 2. Miss distance for various engagements
PPN [m] Proposed GL [m]
a 503.9331 0.88676
b 462.6664 2.3375
c 517.7981 10.7823
d 647.7636 17.0274
e 108.5484 43.2230
f 188.7315 59.3149


4. Conclusion

We have proposed a guidance law suitable for a
strapdown seeker with narrow FOV against a high speed
target. In this paper, we used the PNG law to null the LOS
rate to the target mixed with a second guidance law to
lessen the look angle. We used the sliding mode control
methodology to derive the second guidance law. In
addition, to improve the guidance performance, we
determined the switching boundary of the first and second
guidance laws in real time. In addition, we obtained the
improvement that the strapdown seeker has a bit wider
FOV as a result of this modified guidance law. The
proposed guidance law excellently accomplishes interception
of the target when the conventional PNG law fails to
intercept the target because of the narrow seeker FOV.
Acknowledgements

This research is partially supported by the Automation
and Systems Research Institute (ASRI) in Seoul National
University.


References

[1] R. K. Mehra and R. D. Ehrich, Air-to-Air Missile
Guidance For Strapdown Seekers, Proceedings of
23rd Conference on Decision and Control, Las Vegas,
NV, 1984, pp. 1109-1115.
[2] S. A. Jang, C. K. Ryoo, K. Y. Choi and M. J. Tahk,
Guidance Algorithms for Tactical Missiles with
Strapdown Seeker, Proceedings of SICE Annual
Conference 2008, 2008, pp. 2616-2619.
[3] S. A. Murtaugh, and H. E. Criel, Fundamentals of
Proportional Navigation, IEEE Spectrum, Vol. 3, No.
6, 1966, PP. 75-85.
[4] P. J. Yuan, and J. S. Chern, Ideal Proportional
Navigation, Journal of Guidance, Control, and
Dynamics, Vol. 15, No. 5, 1992, pp. 1161-1166.
[5] C. D. Yang, F. B. Yeh, and F. B. Hsiao, Generalized
Guidance Law for Homing Missiles, IEEE Trans-
actions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol.
AES-25, No. 2, 1989, pp. 197-212.
[6] H. J. Pastric, S. Setlzer, and M. E. Warren, Guidance
Laws for Short Range Homing Missile, Journal of
Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1981,
pp. 98-108.
[7] J. R. Cloutier, J. H. Evers, and J. J. Feeley,
Assessment of Air to Air Missile Guidance and
Control Technology, IEEE Control Systems Magazine,
Vol. 9, 1989, pp. 27-34.
[8] Z. Paul, Tactical and Strategic Missile Guidance,
third Edition, Progress in Astronautics and Aero-
nautics, Vol. 176 , 1997.
[9] U. S. Shukla, P. R. Mahapatra, The Proportional
Navigation Dilemma-Pure or True?, IEEE Trans-
actions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol 26,
No. 2, 1990, pp. 382-392.
[10] M. Xin, S. N. Balakrishnan, E. J. Ohlmeyer, Guidance
Law Design for Missiles with Reduced Seeker Field-
of-View, AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control
Conference and Exhibit, Keystone, Colorado, 2006,
pp. 711-719.
[11] D. K. Sang, C. k. Ryoo, M. J. Tahk, A Guidance
Law with a Switching Logic for Maintaining Seekers
Lock-on for Stationary Targets, KSAS International
Journal. Vol. 9, No. 2, 2008, pp. 87-97.
[12] K. Ravindra Babu, I. G. Sarma, and K. N. Swamy,
Switched Bias Proportional Navigation for Homing
Guidance Against Highly Maneuvering Targets,
Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 17,
No. 6, 1994, pp. 1357-1363.
A Hybrid Guidance Law for a Strapdown Seeker to Maintain Lock-on Conditions against High Speed Targets

196
[13] I. J. Ha, J. S Hur, M. S. Ko, T. L. Song, Performance
Analysis of PNG Laws for Randomly Maneuvering
Targets, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Elec-
tronic Systems, Vol. 26, No. 5, pp. 713-721.
[14] S. N. Ghawghawe and D. Ghose, Pure Proportional
Navigation Against Time Varying Target Maneuvers,
IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic
Systems, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 1336-1346.


Chae Heun Lee received B.S degree
from Seoul National University. He is
currently a candidate for the Ph.D.
degree in the Department of Electrical
Engineering and Computer Science,
Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
His main research field is inertial navi-
gation system and guidance.

Chul Hyun received the B.S. and Ph.
D. degrees in the School of Electrical
Engineering & Computer Science at
Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea,
in 2001 and 2011, respectively. From
2011, he is Research Engineer in LIG
Nex1. His research interests include in-
ertial sensor, control of AUV, and guidance.

Jang Gyu Lee is a Professor in the
School of Electrical Engineering &
Computer Science at Seoul National
University. He received his Ph. D.
degree in Electrical Engineering from
University of Pittsburgh, USA in 1977.
He was the Director of Automation and
System Research Institute, Seoul Na-
tional University, 1996-1998. He worked at the Analytic
Sciences Corp. (TASC) & Charles Stark Draper Lab.,
Technical Staff, 1977-1982. He is currently in charge of the
Editorial Advisory Board Member, International Journal of
Space Technology and the Associate Editor, International
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Systems and Networks.
He charged the General Chairman, Editor, 14
th
IFAC
Symposium on Automatic Control in Aerospace, 98.8.24-
28. His current research topics include INS, GPS, eLoran,
Guidance, Estimation
Jin Young Choi received the B.S.,
M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in control and
instrumentation engineering from Seoul
Nation University, Seoul, Korea, in
1982, 1984, and 1993, respectively.
From 1984 to 1989, he was with the
Electronics and Telecommunication
Research Institute (ETRI). From 1992
to 1994, he was with the Basic Research Department of
ETRI, where he was a Senior Member of the Technical
Staff working on the neural information system. Since
1994, he has been with Seoul National University, where
he is currently a Professor in the School of Electrical Engi-
neering and Computer Science, Seoul National University.
His research interests include pattern classification, neural
computing and control, evolutionary computing, adaptive
and learning control, and their applications.


Sankyung Sung received the Ph.D.
degrees in Electrical Engineering from
Seoul National University, Korea, in
2003. From 2003 to 2007, he was with
the TN Research Center in Samsung
Electronics Inc. Currently, he is an As-
sociate Professor in the Department of
Aerospace Information Engineering,
Konkuk University. His research interests include inertial
sensors, integrated navigation and system, and autonomous
unmanned systems.

You might also like